Up
Movie Review
"Up"
Review by Eric D. Snider
Grade: A-
Rating: PG
Released: Friday, May 29, 2009
Directed by:
Cast:
Here it is, the 10th feature film from Pixar Animation Studios, and the 10th one to redefine the rules of animated moviemaking, even compared to previous Pixar films. The studio's last offering, "WALL-E," worked hard to establish the realistic, nuts-and-bolts details of futuristic mechanical devices, and created a plausible vision of the future in the process. "Up" looks at reality and says, "Eh, who needs it?" A man lifting his house off the ground with nothing more than a thousand helium-filled party balloons? Sure! Dogs with computerized collars that vocalize their thoughts? Why not!
"Up" is an old-school adventure fantasy, complete with biplanes and a zeppelin, offbeat explorers, and exotically dangerous locales. If it were a live-action film, it would be separated into 10-minute chunks and shown as a serial on Saturday afternoons at the local movie house. (In the 1930s, of course. Not today.) It's breezy, clever, hilarious, and entertaining -- all par for the course at Pixar -- and has the depth and intelligence that separate Pixar from every other animation factory. Some other cartoons might be funnier, but none have more heart -- more genuine, poignant human emotion -- than the stories that Pixar tells.
The film is split into two chunks (or, if you prefer, it's one chunk preceded by a lengthy prologue). In the beginning, there is Carl Fredricksen (voice of Jeremy Leary), a young boy in huge, square eyeglasses who goes to the movies every week to watch films like "Up" -- it's the late 1930s, or thereabouts -- and catch newsreels detailing the latest exploits of his hero, the famed explorer Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer). Carl longs to be an adventurer himself, and is gobsmacked to meet a girl his age, Ellie (Elie Docter), who is similarly inclined.
As Michael Giacchino's wistful score provides musical accompaniment, we see a wordless montage of Carl and Ellie's life together: They grow up, they get married, they buy a fixer-upper, they dream of taking an adventure trip to South America, their lives pass happily. Not yet convinced of Pixar's storytelling brilliance? This sequence conveys that Carl and Ellie wanted children but were unable to conceive -- an important part of Carl's development as a character, but seemingly impossible to relate in a cartoon without being awkward or embarrassing, and yet director Pete Docter ("Monsters, Inc.") and his co-writer, Bob Peterson ("Finding Nemo"), have done it, as sublimely and beautifully as everything else. What other filmmakers would even TRY such a thing, let alone pull it off with such aplomb?
The meat of the story comes after this prologue, when Carl (now voiced by Edward Asner) is a cranky old widower who misses his departed Ellie and only wants to be left alone. A brief but serious turn of events might lead to his being forced into a retirement home, and so, left with no alternative, he affixes a thousand helium balloons to his house and floats away. His destination: Paradise Falls, in South America, where he and Ellie always wanted to go.
As you probably already know, however, Carl is not alone. Russell (Jordan Nagai), a relentlessly helpful neighborhood boy and Wilderness Explorer, was under the porch when the house lifted off, and is now along for the ride whether Carl likes it or not. (Spoiler: Carl does not like it.) What follows is a story that grows broader and crazier as it goes, with Carl and Russell reaching South America and encountering unusual animals and a deranged human, before it finds its way back to sanity again in time for a sweet, satisfying conclusion.
The film is hard to classify by genre. It has elements of the road-trip odd-couple buddy comedy, and some dazzling adventure (the vertiginous heights attained by the balloon-house are particularly impressive in 3D), with some ruminations on mortality and the importance of seizing the present rather than dwelling on the past. The story is often very funny but seldom wacky or slapstick, and it's bookended by sequences that are something else altogether: touching and heartfelt, and unlike almost anything I've ever seen in an animated film.
There are details in the middle part of the story that seem daffier and less plausible than they ought to be, though that might just be a personal preference. (Don't you hate when movie critics say "they shouldn't have done that" when all they really mean is "that's not how I would have done it"?) At any rate, despite the story's high-flying extremes, the characters and their emotions are consistently grounded in reality. Pixar has once again made a movie full of vivid imagination and whimsy, a genuine treat for kids and grownups alike.
Grade: A-
Rated PG, mild action violence and dangerous situations
1 hr., 38 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.
This item has 26 comments
May 29, 2009 at 7:27 am
Yes! Up is here!
Can't wait until it comes to Ireland...
Ah, Pixar.
Makes me happy.
May 29, 2009 at 8:47 pm
We saw it on opening night. Six thumbs up! (Two each from the three of us.)
Note, though, that some parts may be scary to four-year-olds.
Also note that you're best off not reading any reviews or seeing any previews. It's a Pixar movie, and it's brilliant like all of them. Go see it! Then read the reviews when you're done.
May 31, 2009 at 6:56 pm
See it in 3D if at all possible. We had no idea what the movie was about, but decided to go on a whim (just my husband and me). So glad we did. It was adorable and moving and colorful and full of pure emotions...and the voice of the little boy (Russell) is perfect. We were in a theater full of kids and parents-that made it fun as well...and people clapped at the end. It's a keeper.
May 31, 2009 at 10:25 pm
It was awesome in 3-D! It was so funny to see my nephews trying to grab stuff on the screen. It was such a fun & sweet movie, & I would recommend setting aside a couple of kleenex!!! My neice & I teared up a few times!
June 1, 2009 at 9:10 am
Saw it Saturday afternoon with my wife and 2-year old child. He's wanted to see "Balloon Show" ever since he saw the teaser on the Wall-E DVD. Great movie, but some of it was pretty intense for our little guy.
June 6, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Heh, my two-year-old calls it "Grandpa Movie." :)
June 13, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Words cannot adequately articulate how much I loved this movie.
June 18, 2009 at 11:48 am
Great review, Eric, as always.
I gave the movie an "A" on Ellen's Entertainment Report Card.
Good to see you last night. Once again, I apologize for the rude, loud comments with my grandson at the "Up" screening.
I'll be interested in seeing where you go with "Year One." I'm writing two reviews -- one for prissy, religious people and one for gross, theatrical, and out-there people who secretly enjoy coarse, vulgar movies. I've got one foot in each category!
"Year One" -- will it be a HIT or a MISS?
Regards from EK
June 22, 2009 at 12:26 pm
My girlfriend and I saw this film last week and I am still mildly depressed . Within 10 minutes of the start we were both in tears and the rest of the movie never managed to bring us out of the funk. It went down down down and then only up up . Not enough UP to counteract the down. Sure there were some good laughs ( the dogs were hysterical) but the overall effect was depressing. Unfulfilled dreams + lonely widower + childhood heroes becoming villains + fatherless fat kids = depressing. Ok ok , so the old man has a change of heart for the last 5 minutes of the movie, it was not nearly enough to counterbalance the sadness. In this case the " I would have done it differently" impulse is completely warranted. I would only recommend this movie to people who enjoy paying to feel sad.
June 27, 2009 at 9:50 am
This movie is so stupid! Disney has gone too far. From foolish sequels, to babyish movies that have no meaning, sometimes I wish that Walt Disney was still alive right now and look at the mess Disney Pictures has been making recently. This movie is social life mixed with fantasy. What the heck is Kevin (the rainbow-colored bird) supposed to be? Kevin's actually a female, so don't ask me why it has a male name. There is no such thing as a collar that activates an animal's thoughts and emotions. I don't think I ever heard of a place called Paradise Falls. There are some awful jokes in this film, such as squirrel forgetting to collect his acorns for the winter, and dying. I know this is a kid's film, but there are some elements in this film that kid's won't understand, or will scare their boots off, such as Carl's wife dying, or the adventure chase scenes. This movie is only suitable for kids ages 7-10. When the film ended, I was glad it was over. If you have other things to do besides watch this piece of trash, I wouldn't recommend it.
June 27, 2009 at 11:50 am
Also on the list of things dinogirl has never heard of: Fiction.
June 27, 2009 at 12:09 pm
hang on -- there's no such thing as collars that speak for animals, but Lions and Mice can talk without them in other Disney shows and that is fine?
June 27, 2009 at 12:21 pm
You have to admit it, Eric. Dinogirl has a point. I mean, think about it. All of the Disney classics are COMPLETELY realistic and take place in location we could find on a map. What are they thinking making a fictional movie??
June 27, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Dinogirl is lol crazy some more. What whacked out world does she live in that can't have both collars that allow dogs to talk and a toaster that can do things that would cause it to be characterized as brave? Oh...and lions totally talk and have friendly rapport with talking warthogs and talking meercats in this world.
Dinogirl, you are a nutter. Shh...
June 27, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Maybe dinogirl is trying to be ironic. Although, why she would think this is a good place for that, I am not sure. Maybe trying to make fun of #9's comment by being way over the top...
Otherwise, dinogirl, your comments are definitely weird.
June 28, 2009 at 3:20 am
Hi Uncle Paul!
I agree with #9. I didn't dislike the movie, but I cried 4 times throughout the movie and then sat there crying for 5 minutes during the credits. Call it hormones, but it was definitely more of a downer than an upper for me.
June 28, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Everybody has thair own opinions, OK?
June 28, 2009 at 3:43 pm
If you don;t have anything nice to say, then don't say anything. I'm getting tired of people not letting me speak up for myself. It's MY comment, not yours. Can you believe these people, Eric?
June 28, 2009 at 3:58 pm
If you don;t have anything nice to say, then don't say anything. I'm getting tired of people not letting me speak up for myself. It's MY comment, not yours. Can you believe these people, Eric?
No one's preventing you from speaking up for yourself. You're allowed to voice your opinions, no matter how laughable they are, and other people are allowed to disagree with them and point out their flaws. You don't get to choose how people respond to you when you speak publicly.
("If you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything" is what convinces me you're either a troll or 12 years old. No rational adult who started a conversation by posting negative comments would then try to stave off objections by insisting people only speak positively.)
June 28, 2009 at 6:18 pm
All movies could benefit from a talking dog character ... I don't think anyone can argue with that.
June 29, 2009 at 9:30 am
Well, I think that dinogirl has a crush on Eric. That is why she is posting nonsensical comments that go against what anyone rational or intelligent would say (not that disliking a movie other people like is irrational or unintelligent, just that her arguments tend toward the irrational and unintelligent), then gets upset when people disagree with her and then appeals to Eric to protect her when the meanies on his site disagree with her, even though she disagreed with Eric and made silly arguments that he is bound to disagree with, but he links them on his twitter, so she's getting his attention. So, yeah, Eric, I think someone has a crush on you and wants your attention. You don't tend to respond to the well-thought-out and rational arguments, even those that disagree with you.
June 29, 2009 at 9:31 am
#16: Hi, Valerie. I am assuming you are the daughter of Keith and Kerry, but you took a chance as there are quite a few Paul Normans that pop up when you Google the name. Glad to see you have discovered Eric. My problem with with #9 is that I find the idea that one should not pay good money for a movie that invokes sadness. Even if it is more sadness than happiness on balance.
By that standard a classic movie (or book, for that matter) like "Gone with the Wind" is one to avoid as there is so much hadrship and frustration with Scarlett's blindness. Even the ending is not a happy one.
June 29, 2009 at 2:35 pm
If this is a fantasy movie, how come the dogs talked without the collars?
June 29, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Hi Uncle Paul !
Thank you for correcting me , I totally agree ... sadness does not equal badness
BUT
The movie is called "UP" ... it left me down. Others as well. I think they were trying to invoke the the full emotional range from sadness to redemption/happiness but fell short on the upswing. I "think" that was what they were going for but what the hell do I know. If that was indeed their intention I think they failed. That was what I meant to say.
( I love gone with the wind too :)
June 30, 2009 at 6:44 am
Sorry, timmythegreek, I just do NOT recall having you as a nephew. Hmm, maybe I should start signing in as Uncle Paul, instead of Paul Norman.
I am also sorry that Up did not meet your expectations as a mostly upbeat cartoon. I concede that something not meeting expectations is pretty disappointing--how do I say that without seeming redundant? It was your snarky end line "I would only recommend this movie to people who enjoy paying to feel sad," that lead me to think you do not like such movies in general.
January 23, 2010 at 5:00 pm
While I loved the beginning of the film and that lovely sequence that shows Carl and Ellie's life, I hated that kid Russell!! He was so annoying and obnoxious, and I hate it when the plot of a movie is helped along by the stupid decisions of a selfish and annoying kid. I really wanted Carl to realize his wife's dream of having their house at the waterfall; it seemed like the closure he needed, and I hated that kid for getting in the way. Wall-E was so much better.